US State Department Hacks Al-Qaeda Websites In Yemen

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US State Department Hacks Al-Qaeda Websites In Yemen

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday May 24, 2012 @05:08AM from the hearts-and-minds dept.

shuttah writes "In the growing Al-Qaeda activity in Yemen, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed today that 'cyber experts' had recently hacked into web sites being used by an Al-Qaeda affiliate, substituting the group's anti-American rhetoric with information about civilians killed in terrorist strikes. Also this week, a statement from the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs revealed the presence an Al-Qaeda video calling for 'Electronic Jihad.'"

10 of 245 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

...Huh? by twotacocombo · 2012-05-24 05:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

The feds hack a website, and they issue a triumphant press release. Anonymous does it, and they release the hounds.
1. Re:...Huh? by betterunixthanunix · 2012-05-24 05:16 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  As if this is news? For decades, the feds have been busting into innocent people's homes and killing them and their dogs, without being arrested or imprisoned for it. Now, if I were to throw a grenade into someone's house, rush in with an assault rifle and kill them, what do you suppose would happen to me?
  
  --
  Palm trees and 8
2. Re:...Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-24 05:20 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Maybe they'd be okay with it if Anonymous hacked terrorist websites instead of the websites of Western governments and businesses?
  Terrorists defined so by Western Governments makes everything alright, doesn't it? No. If you call hacking a crime, then it is a crime for the government too. It is stupid they made it public, because now they acting like terrorists themselves. This is why more terrorists exist.
3. Re:...Huh? by Nadaka · 2012-05-24 05:43 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Yes, it is merely a fortunate side side effect.
4. Re:...Huh? by kiwimate · 2012-05-24 05:53 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Point one - it wasn't hacking; they posted counter-propaganda messages on a comment forum. Earlier versions of the story called it hacking, but that was updated within minutes.
  Point two - Anonymous releases plenty of triumphant press releases themselves. Anonymous releases their "hounds" (i.e. DDOS attacks) in response to just about any random provocation. What's your point?
  And...
  Point three - are you seriously equating a counter-propaganda operation against Al Quaeda with DDOS attacks designed to disrupt web sites against somewhat random corporations?
  Al Quaeda deliberately attempts to kill innocent people. Your kids. Your local school teacher. Your sister. That old lady in some small town who never did a bad thing in her life and just wants to pay a visit to New York to see the Big Apple, now that she's getting on in years. Al Quaeda looks at them and says, great, the more harmless and innocent, the better, that'll really get our point across.
  RIAA, MPAA, MasterCard, etc., do not deliberately attempt to kill innocent people.
  I know some of these corporations are poorly regarded by geeks, but please try and keep some fashion of perspective. If you can't legitimately see the difference (as opposed to engaging in hyperbole for deliberate effect), then you have a problem.
  Point four - I'd think the second story (which seems to be overlooked so far) is more interesting. A media release from Al Quaeda encouraging cyber attacks, attacks against the power grid, etc. But that's not as flamebait friendly, is it.
Re:Think of the Civilians! by ArcherB · 2012-05-24 05:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

Seems like a pretty hypocritical message, considering all the civilians we've killed over there. In a place where we shouldn't even have military.
The difference is the target and the intent. When we kill civilians, it's truly by accident. They usually die because a weapon malfunctioned or they were too close to a government building. We also tend to apologize for it and in many cases, notify the civilian population before an attack occurs.. In Iraq, for example, the goal was to free the people there from a tyrant.
Of course, you may disagree with this, but if an Iraqi were to disagree with his government in 2001, they would die. They are free to disagree today. What makes you so special that you deserve freedoms like this and others don't? I served, by the way, not to give you freedoms. You already have them. I served, knowing full well that when I signed, I would be giving those that have not rights the very freedoms that you and I have.
When Al Qaeda kills civilians, the civilians are the target. There is no warning before hand and no apology afterwards. The goal of Al Qaeda is not to free the population, but to convert or enslave them. If you are a Christian, Al Qaeda wants to you convert or die. If you are an atheist, Al Qaeda wants you to convert or die. If you are a Jew, Al Qaeda wants you to die.

--
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Re:They did it... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-24 05:54 · Score: 0, Insightful

It is a matter of record and fact: The US kills more innocent civilians in Yemen - or anywhere else, for that matter - than do any alleged 'al-qaeda' affiliates.
...
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You read it on the interwebz, so it must be true.
Nice selective use of "matter of record and fact" and "alleged".
Re:Think of the Civilians! by sribe · 2012-05-24 06:06 · Score: 3, Insightful

Wait, can you provide citations for this stuff? I mean, the purpose of Al Quaeda actually is to free the population from the foreign opressors (which is the USA in fact, hence the whole attack against the symbol of power in the heart of their financial district)
So then, what exactly is the goal of a suicide bomber in a crowded market full of civilians? Why, exactly, would one need a "citation" to establish that the intent was to kill those civilians?
Of course, if you want citations, Osama Bin Laden himself provided plenty... There really is no shortage, from all sides of al Qaeda, but I'm pretty sure you weren't actually interested.
In other words, go fuck yourself.
Re:Think of the Civilians! by Hatta · 2012-05-24 06:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

When we kill civilians, it's truly by accident.
Bullshit. We know there is going to be "collateral damage" going in, and we go ahead and do it anyway. That's not "truly by accident".
No, when the US kills civilians it knows exactly what it is doing. The powers that be have made a calculation that the benefits outweigh the costs, that's all. The only real question is who actually benefits and who pays the costs.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:They did it... by 1s44c · 2012-05-25 00:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Looks like we gotta kill 2k more to get even. Its like we all forgot that 11 years ago they gave us the biggest fuck you ever. I say burn em all
The people that flew the planes into the buildings are already dead. Before they attacked you they made the decision that they would be willing to die if it meant striking back at their perceived oppressor, the US.
While the US is killing random targets they are creating more and more potential terrorists who will go to greater and greater extremes to get revenge.
If the US stops killing people today it will have less terrorists to deal with in the next 30 or so years.